Posted on 04/11/2009 11:02:34 AM PDT by marktwain
I have never understood the Michael Savage phenomenon. He's loud, he's abrasive, and he's hardly the "conservative" so many apparently think he is. I guess tapping into the border issue has convinced some that he is a kindred spirit. For anyone who place the Constitution first, he is not.
Case in point, today's amazingly ignorant screed, "Why are the police outgunned?":
So I put the question to the Savage Nation. Is it time to ban assault rifles? What are they really needed for? We know, of course, that Savage has no business defining what we "need," although I can think of many tactical situations where an outnumbered peaceable armed citizen with a semiautomatic rifle could be instrumental in deterring violence.
But forget that--we don't need to justify our property to Savage or anyone else. Where do they presume to get the authority to tell us which firearms they'll allow us to own--and how badly do they want to take them from us?
Then there's this bit of injecting doubt and fear into weaker minds:
Of course, I can already hear callers telling me, “Well, Mike, if we’re armed with these weapons, the government can’t possibly take our rights away.” That is nonsense. If the government wants to take your rights away or imprison you for whatever reason, your owning an assault rifle is not going to stop it. Gee, I don't know, Mike. If the scenario you're postulating--a government wanting to take your rights away existed--what kind of subversive cheerleader or just plain coward wouldn't resist? And remember--this is the guy telling his listeners we're being run by a dictatorship--a gang--evil rulers intent on starting another Reichstag fire.
Assuming he believes it, he wants us to disarm for that?
Have you checked the number of gun owners lately, Michael? And have you looked into the honorable patriots in the military and peace officer professions who would not participate in carrying out tyrannical orders?
They call themselves "Oath Keepers". You might want to look into that. They impress me a lot more than you do.
What Savage is proposing is nothing less than taking away from Americans their last resort means of protecting themselves from unmasked tyranny--gutting the very core of the right to keep and bear arms--something envisioned as a necessity by the Founders and codified in the Bill of Rights. He is telling his listeners the Second Amendment is useless, so we might as well give it up.
Savage sets himself up as wiser than the Framers? I don't think so.
And it doesn't surprise me to see him resort to fabrication in this next display of either profound ignorance or deliberate misdirection:
So we have to ask: If the police are not allowed to have these types of weapons, then why is the public allowed have them. What planet have you been living on, Michael? Do you even make an attempt to know what the hell you're talking about? Have you fallen for the "patrol rifle" vs. "assault weapon" deception? Or the "Only Ones" deception?
This doesn't surprise me, either. I warned gun owners about Savage back when he threw his support behind gun-grabber Jerry Brown for California attorney general--you know--the same guy who failed miserably at making a dent in Oakland's violent crime rate, but who was--surprise--endorsed by all those non-Oath Keeper police groups.
Good grief, Michael, the entire concept of "the security of a free state" escapes you, doesn't it? Is it that you're not bright enough to understand that the more good citizens are armed, the safer society will be--including the "outgunned" police?
The judgment I initially formed about you has only been cemented with this latest subversive defeatism you've injected into the "conservative" dialog, Michael:
Anyone wasting time or money following this obnoxious carnival barker is chasing a sterile queen bee. If you've ever bought one of his books, congratulations. You just helped finance the further enslavement of ourselves and our posterity. Get this, Michael: We will not disarm. If you truly think that resistance is futile and disarmament will come easy, you've deluded yourself and anyone stupid enough to believe you or craven enough to want to.
And now that I'm through, Mr. Adams would like to have a word with you:
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen! ------------
A good Savage
That left a bad feeling in my stomach. I had an honorable, now-departed friend with that surname who served on Iwo Jima, and another who is one of the foremost champions of the right to keep and bear arms that I have the honor to know. Of course, they hadn't assumed the name, because they weren't pretenders. Anyway, now seems a pretty good time to remind you that it's not the name, it's the man.
I follow no talk show host.
Well goody goody for you.
Like? What's 'like' have to do with it? It's not personal it's business. The guy is a fool and so are those that are duped by him.
As an old doggie veteran of Truman's miserable Army in Korea, I would much prefer to be in Bush's well trained and equipped Army than in Patton's egg shell tanks.
According to the show, the Stuarts were actually better than the French tanks they faced. Doesn’t say much for the French ones!
Michael savage is a prime factor in the vote turn out last november. He railed against the republicans, against bush and said it was better to have a democrat congress than a weak republican one. He is the reason we have a trillion dollars unaccounted for by the secy of the Treasury.
Because they don't have the same ammount of funding as the prohibition created drug cartels.
How many more decades before they BUY US?
My mom listens to him, and I hear him occasionally. I like him on the social issues of abortion and the traditional family. My mom said that when Obama allowed embryonic stem cell research, he spent three or four nights talking about that. She listens to the other talk shows, and she said none of them spent much time on it.
*What’s he suppose to do, parachute into Iran?*
since I didn’t ask for any talk radio program people or have I ever asked them to parachute into Iran, this
is typical of the over the top deranged views.
Conservatives here in Calif. don’t support liberal democrat Jerry Brown as Savage does.
Savage has spoken out against the Islamofascist enemy with enough force to attract the enemy's attention and threats. What's left for him to do?
RE: My "over the top deranged views."
Pretty good contumely. Nice!
The main problem with Savage is that while he is, for the most, part very good and analytical, he can’t keep his inferiority complex under control; a trait shared by our so-called president 0bama.
I agree that there is definitely a problem. It's surfaced since "going national."
I've listened almost since day one.. nearly fifteen years.
It's been just in the last few years that I've concluded that, well, as long as the good outweighs the bad I'll keep listening.
Those incessant -- and IMO schoolboy -- attacks on conservative competitors have me near the tipping point. I swear I heard him say that his own family asks him to knock it off. But the guy just can't help it. I guess.
(I do not know what happens "inside baseball" but on the air Savage started the name calling.)
Part could well be as you said, inferiority complex. Certainly he's shown sensitivity over the years -- but he did catch hell day one from some KGO liberals; and it has been a battle against S.F. liberals ever since.
.. and the missing days (and third hours) are adding up. If he has health issues he should retire. He's done his calling; to wit, demonstrated that giving hell back to the liberals is a winner. Conservatives don't have to cower and apologize when liberals scream "Racist!" "Bigot!" -- something they've gotten away with for decades.
You lost me. I’ve never heard Savage call for disarming the public. His rant about the police being handcuffing is mainly about the rules set down by the libs and enforced by the media, much like the rules of combat which gives the other side the advantage. When, do you claim, did Savage call for disarming the public?
marktwain lost me. I’ve never heard Savage call for disarming the public. His rant about the police being handcuffing is mainly about the rules set down by the libs and enforced by the media, much like the rules of combat which gives the other side the advantage. When does marktwain claim that Savage called for disarming the public?
You are absolutely correct -- we can add the Navy's "floating brothels" to that. The criticism is of rules set down by the libs and their tolerance of the shenanigans not line personnel.
Obviously one cannot tune in a broadcast or two and get a clear picture of the host. That is especially true of Savage. He can be outrageous for effect or humor.
I remember when Rush Limbaugh started his career (talk show version) in Sacramento. I wondered who is this nut the first time or two. It was later stated by Limbaugh and others that you had to listen regularly for at least two weeks to understand. True.
When Limbaugh left for New York years later many of us thought that the rest of the nation would not understand (like we did) and he'd fail.
That's not much to hang the subsequent verbiage on. Lacking any further quotes of substance, I have to wonder whether Michael was referring to the fact that many/most cops ARE outgunned by the fact that they're not allowed to carry adequate firepower. The solution isn't to disarm the populace, it's to put an M16 in every cop car (and, btw, let upstanding citizens do the same).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.